The Washington Post is hardly known as a fan of all things Bush. Nevertheless, the paper’s analysis of reading and math scores among low-income students in Maryland and Virginia shows that NCLB is working.

In Montgomery County, for example, needy students have since 2002 sliced in half the 28-point gap in reading that separated them from the county average. In Prince George’s County, where nearly half of students are in poverty, test scores have climbed steadily since 2003.

Now before our beloved WMB liberals start naysaying, know this: The Post isn’t saying NCLB is all successful, all the time. The article based on the paper’s analysis does point out flaws in, and complaints about, the program.

But here’s what I took away: Even teachers and principals admit NCLB’s accountability features have caused them to pay more attention to low-income kids, who typically approach school from a disadvantaged position. In addition, NCLB’s teeth have caused administrators to stress literacy, the key to all other academic pursuits.

I bring this up because, IMHO, the Post’s analysis underscores which presidential candidate has the correct read on NCLB. As I reported in September, both Obama and McCain support continuing the program. But Obama calls NCLB a “broken promise” to children that has “demoralized our teachers” and needs “fundamental” change. Obama would move away from assessments that test student mastery of fundamentals, and also remove NCLB’s big stick: the accountability measures that the Post’s analysis shows are working.

McCain, on the other hand, calls NCLB “invaluable in providing a clear picture of which schools and students are struggling” but sees the program as “only the beginning of education reform.” The Arizona senator would move away from assessments that focus on “group averages” and focus instead on “inspiring every child to reach his or her potential.”

On education reform in this country, Obama shor talk purty…but the data, in high-poverty D.C. at least, show he’s wrong.